Mitt Romney’s troubling past assertions that his mother was pro-choice in 1970 are rooted in an ongoing tradition of male politicians using their female relatives to bolster their credibility with female voters. The problem is that it’s really not that helpful.

Gloucester High to provide contraception for students; How is Bush’s decision to cut off contraception for African women ‘pro-life’?; Amy Schalet has a question for Sarah Palin; European court may, or may not, rule on choice; Tiffany Campbell makes powerful case against South Dakota abortion ban; Maine Senate candidates answer question on Roe.

HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt blogs again about the proposed HHS regulations that redefine contraception as abortion, without mentioning the word contraception. But he demonstrates he knows how to play the game of far-right ideological abortion politics.

by Marcela Howell, In Our Own Voice: National Black Women’s Reproductive Justice Agenda

July 16, 2008 - 7:00 am

Home to Netroots Nation this week, the progressive convention for political activists and bloggers, Texas is also home to the highest teen birth rate in the nation while spending more on abstinence-only programs than any state. The mix is the perfect recipe for political change.

It’s an official quadrennial tradition: Every four years, self-described moderates advise the Democratic Party that its long-standing and electorally successful pro-choice position is the reason that “values voters” are deserting the party. We are told these voters could be brought into the fold if Democrats would temper their defense of women’s freedom with tacit condemnation of the choices many women make.